In recent years, I have noticed a trend in the news, in politics, in education and in entertainment toward increasing ridicule and rejection of the validity of abstinence as an effective means of birth control, among other things. As a pastor of a church, obviously, this issue represents more than just a political or social concept. However, leaving the morality of the issue aside, let us consider the facts.
Abstinence and those who advocate it are repeatedly cast in a dubious and often ridiculous light in the entertainment industry. Television shows predominately paint abstinence advocates as trite and antiquated dolts who could not logically defend their position if their life depended on it. Many times, the portrayal includes a gross moral failure on the part of the advocates "so-called".
The news media seems to be in agreement with Hollywood on this. Some reporters, or perhaps the blame lies at the feet of their editors, seem all too eager to elaborate on the details of the moral failures of anyone who at one time advocated abstinence.
Politicians...well, do we have to go there? Unfortunately, Governor Palin, who I'm quite sure advocated abstinence teaching, was suddenly faced with the hard, cold reality that her own daughter became pregnant out of wedlock. Needless to say, that prompted a heartless feeding frenzy in certain circles. Frankly, I'm sorely put out by people who gleefully point out the moral failures of "the other party" when everyone knows that biblically neither party is morally superior to the other. Additionally, both parties have had their share of sex scandals, a fact that should have put any stone casters to rest a long time ago.
In education, suffice it to say that abstinence has been all but laughed right out of the classroom.
At this point, the conversation could go in a hundred directions. I'll try to stay close to my point. I am of the opinion that abstinence has been rejected out right by most for the following reasons:
1. As a result of the sexual revolution/liberation of the 60's and 70's, many who are parents today certainly are not going to hold their children to a higher moral standard than the one they lived out as youngsters. After all, that would be almost hypocritical, no? So, we continue to lower the standard, because we didn't hold it any higher ourselves.
2. Abstinence has its foundation in religious teaching. After all, it is primarily religious people who have a problem with the idea of sex outside of marriage. The rest of the world doesn't have a leg to stand on. Remove the concept of "god" and "holy writings" from humanity and you have absolutely no basis on which to build morality, especially on the issue of sex outside of marriage. If there is no God, or at least no moral God who gives a flying flip about what we do here, then I can have sex with whomever or whatever I want, and at any age and under any circumstances as long as it's consensual. Since America is becoming an increasingly atheistic or at least agnostic country, abstinence is falling by the way side.
3. Abstinence has been ridiculed as a failed experiment. I think I know why. You only hear about the failures. No one is reporting the literally thousands (dare I suggest millions?) of couples around the world who are virgins until the day they are married? No one is out flaunting their virginity, because traditionally those who maintain it are much more modest than those who do not. We are sure to hear about Governor Palin's daughter because Governor Palin advocated a high moral standard that she was not able to maintain in her own home. May I suggest that her daughter is the exception and not the rule?
I could go on to talk about the advantage abstinence teaching has over ALL the other related concepts, but I think I'll save that for another blog.
I'm genuinely interested in hearing your opinions about this. If you're rude or act like an idiot on my blog, I'll tell your mother. So, behave yourselves!
Thanks for stopping by!